1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Around 01:00 on June 25, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff driven a B car free car on the front of the sports park located in the Sinsking-dong in the Sinsking-si under the influence of alcohol at a 0.110% (the result of a smoking measurement), the Defendant, applying Article 93(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act, issued the instant disposition revoking the Plaintiff’s Class 1 ordinary car driver’s license (license number: C) as of August 7, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap 1, Eul 4 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff had a substitute driver after drinking alcohol while taking a separate ceremony of workplace rent on the same day, but did not go to the driving stand even after he did not go to the driving stand, and the drinking driving was controlled.

Considering the fact that the Plaintiff did not inflict human and physical damage on others due to drinking driving at the time, blood alcohol concentration is relatively minor, currently serving 23 years in the automobile parts company of the Silified Corporation, the driver’s license is essential for commuting to and from the long distance, and the spouse and two children attending the university should be supported, etc., the instant disposition is in violation of the law of abuse of discretionary power by excessively harshly treating the Plaintiff.

B. Even if the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is an administrative agency's discretionary act, in light of today's mass means of transportation, and the situation where a driver's license is issued in large quantities, the increase of traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, and the seriousness of the result, etc., the need for public interest to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving should be emphasized, and the revocation of a driver's license on the ground of drinking driving on the ground of drinking driving should be prevented rather than the disadvantage of the party to whom the revocation would be suffered, unlike the revocation of the general beneficial administrative act.